,
19 tweets,
6 min read
Read on Twitter
Why I Am Not Celebrating the Mueller Hearings theepochtimes.com/why-i-am-not-c… via @epochtimes
@EpochTimes We, the People are expected to accept without question, without evidence, that “Russia hacked the DNC”or, —rather, that “the Russians systematically and sweepingly interfered in the election”...
@EpochTimes ...because Crowdstrike, a DNC contractor with a spotty record, co-founded by a Mueller protege named Shawn Henry, said so. The FBI never even reviewed Crowdstrike’s final report, having received only a redacted, draft version.
@EpochTimes As we well and wearily know, the finding of Russian hacking has had serious political and national security implications—but not serious enough for any government agency to verify it.
@EpochTimes Not serious enough for Republicans to question it. According to Crowdstrike—again, not according to any government or independent investigation—
@EpochTimes ...Russia “hacked” the DNC, and, the story goes, gave the “stolen” emails to Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange, thus “interfering” with the 2016 election of Donald Trump.
@EpochTimes Oh, but Julian Assange’s Wikileaks is a “a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.” Former CIA Director/Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said so!
@EpochTimes Yes, but Pompeo made this statement also without legitimate evidence. New to the CIA directorship, he was relying on the so-called Intelligence Community Assessment of January 2017, fobbed off on the American people by anti-Trump co-conspirators Clapper, Brennan, and Comey.
@EpochTimes The fact is, this “intelligence Community” assessment, too, is based on DNC junk—almost certainly the Crowdstrike report and the discredited Steele dossier.
@EpochTimes No wonder deep inside the assessment appears this disclaimer: “Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents. …
@EpochTimes … High confidence in a judgment does not imply that the assessment is a fact or a certainty; such judgments might be wrong.”
@EpochTimes Nice CYA, but these same judgments that might be wrong have set the course of American politics and history as the new gospel that must not be questioned. Why ever not?
@EpochTimes Why didn’t Republicans ask why the Special Counsel didn’t examine the DNC server? Why he didn’t interview the single most important witness to “Russian interference”—Julian Assange?
@EpochTimes Why he didn’t investigate the murder of DNC official Seth Rich, whom Assange has strongly implied was a Wikileaks source?
@EpochTimes Why he didn’t investigate the forensics evidence developed by a team of intelligence professionals (VIPS) led by former NSA technical director William Binney that demonstrates there was no DNC “hack”?
@EpochTimes Because it would blow the Big Lie of Russian interference on President Trump’s behalf sky high?
@EpochTimes Maybe this is not the moment to ask whether anyone else feels snookered, not while Trump supporters are still crowing about Mueller’s foggy, feeble performance, and the apparent end of the Democrats’ impeachment dreams
@EpochTimes When all of that wears thin, however, I am afraid our humiliation will have gained Mt. Rushmore-solidity as “court history,” accepted without evidence, bowed to without question: Russia interfered in 2016 to help Donald Trump.
@EpochTimes Without one shred of evidence to support the theory that Russia interfered in our election because they wanted Trump to win, the wimpy GOP has rolled over and swallowed this concocted Brennan conjecture with nary a peep!
